Namaste, Namegate & Nicorette Gum: President Obama Visits India

Dignitary visits present many opportunities to observe protocol in action, and presidential visits may be the best in providing lessons learned–both good and bad.

President and Mrs. Obama visited India recently. The President was seen using the traditional namaste greeting. Greetings set the tone of a visit, and I believe this was an appropriate and respectful way to show some understanding of India’s culture and people.

White House Notebook:
U.S. President Barack Obama folds his hands in a traditional Indian greeting gesture.

While there, he met with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Damodardas Modi. During one of their meetings, the Prime Minister wore a pinstripe suit which made news when it was discovered that the pinstripe consisted of his name. Clearly, the Prime Minister has an excellent tailor, but the media and Indian people were not impressed by the prime minister’s sartorial preferences. See full story here.

A close-up appears to show the pattern spells out the prime minister’s name: Narendra Damodardas Modi.

Most of us in the U.S. know that President Obama often chews Nicorette gum to fight his cigarette cravings. Unfortunately, the world continues to see him chewing in the most official settings. This is seen as rude and disrespectful by most people, but in India President Obama went beyond simply chewing his gum. Watch this.

Thank you for the very positive reception of the first issue of Protocol Perspective. In addition to the emails and calls of encouragement, the issue spurred an interesting dialogue with different perspectives.

One colleague reminded me of one of the fundamental principles of protocol: avoid doing anything that will distract from the main objective of a visit or event. In this case, the idea was that had Mrs. Obama worn a headscarf in Saudi Arabia, she would have avoided the media coverage focusing on her lack of one, which distracted from the main goal of the visit–paying respects to the Saudi king. Another colleague felt the President and Mrs. Obama were using the lack of a headscarf to make a political point about the role of women, and that it was important as such. This colleague also felt that had Mrs. Obama worn a headscarf, the U.S. media and some politicians would also have cried foul.

We may never know if the decision not to wear a headscarf was meant to be a politically symbolic one. The reality is that sometimes there is no win-win. The best a person can do is seek the best counsel possible from the experts on all of the possible ramifications–protocol, political, legal and public relations. In the end, when there is no definitive right or wrong, that person must do what feels true for that individual and the company, organization or country they represent. Whatever the decision you must also be aware of the consequences of that decision and be ready to stand by it.

In my experience, politics does sometimes trump protocol. For example, I quickly learned that during an election year, a mayor might not meet with a visiting foreign government official if it conflicted with a political event, even though I thought the meeting was important, and under normal circumstances would have been scheduled. My job was to advise to the best of my ability, and push or make a case for a particular course of action when I felt necessary. But I also had to step back once the mayor, chief of staff, and other key advisers had heard me out and made a decision, even if I did not always agree. If at some point, as a protocol adviser you find that you are on the losing end of the majority of these judgment calls, and you disagree with how the administration or your boss is doing things, you will then have a tough decision to make as to whether you can continue to serve in your role.

Thank you for all of the different viewpoints. I hope you will continue to share your perspectives so we can learn from each other.

Trackback from your site.